• Introducing Dark Mode! Switch by clicking on the lightbulb icon next to Search or by clicking on Default style at the bottom left of the page!

Is anything close to JD Edwards E1...

jolly

Reputable Poster
When it comes to ease of development of a web/database/forms application?

I am biased because I spend a lot of time on it, but I have yet to see a platform that can support the creation of a generic web based business application as easily as JDE.

Sometimes I have a client that wants a small application outside of JDE... in the past these might have been thrown together with VB or MSAccess. But I've not seen anything web based to compare.

Oracle APEX is ok, but either its paradigm is too restricting or I am too entrenched in the JDE paradigm. Plus the coding is in PLSQL...

Most of the other tools I know ... asp.net, java etc all require as much if not more coding to build a "hello world" app than JDE needs to build a reasonable Find/Browse plus Fix/Inspect application.

Am I missing something? Is there a comparable web application development tool out there under which I can simply build some forms and data-models with a GUI and drop some event code in to create a small application for a 3 user business?

Cheers
JohnO
 

jdelisths

Reputable Poster
Take a look at VS Lightswitch: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff851953.aspx

PS: I just want to add one thing. Yes, creating a web app in E1 is fairly easy, but you are essentially locked down to E1's framework and you have to do things "their way". Frameworks like Java, .Net, Ruby etc. are more open and take more time to understand, but you learn a whole lot and expand your horizons in software development. Just my 2c.
 

sselman

Well Known Member
There is a lot to be said for standardizing a platform with simple apps. Customers are comfortable and any of the IT staff can support the app. If you build something custom, you need to make sure you have a backup for the skillset in case they walk out the door one day.
 

jolly

Reputable Poster
Take a look at VS Lightswitch: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff851953.aspx

PS: I just want to add one thing. Yes, creating a web app in E1 is fairly easy, but you are essentially locked down to E1's framework and you have to do things "their way". Frameworks like Java, .Net, Ruby etc. are more open and take more time to understand, but you learn a whole lot and expand your horizons in software development. Just my 2c.
Indeed. Nut JDE's framework is very good though, as is their design paradigm for business applications. It doesn't get you state of the art user interfaces, but most businesses don't need (or want) that.
 

RussellCodlin

Reputable Poster
You're comparing apples and space ships (let alone oranges). I can publish a hello world java web application on the internet in about 1 hour and most of that time will be spent signing up to a hosting provider and registering a domain. It takes months to put JDE into production before you can supply a production "hello world" application to users. Even if you were only to use JDE demo data it still takes at least three days to get a full environment up and running.

The E1 design paradigm is a right royal pain the butt. When they did the port from World to OneWorld someone forgot to mention MVC to architects. So now we have this situation where business logic is spread between the UI and functions. Top it off they added an extra layer of hell in the form of co-existence. So now you've got business functions that have logic based on a hard coded list of calling interactive programs or reports. Who does that and why does it still exist 20 years later?

Why do you think AIS exists? Why do you think they had to build what is effectively a web screen scraper to be able to interact with E1? The only way they could come up with to unlock all the thousands of lines of code locked in interactive applications.
 

BOster

Legendary Poster
When they did the port from World to OneWorld someone forgot to mention MVC to architects. So now we have this situation where business logic is spread between the UI and functions. Top it off they added an extra layer of hell in the form of co-existence. So now you've got business functions that have logic based on a hard coded list of calling interactive programs or reports. Who does that and why does it still exist 20 years later?
Agreed. But, you can apply a sort of MVC architecture to JDE applications even if there is not an MVC "framework" built into the toolset. It is very rare that I build a big APPL with data bound controls and business logic in the APPL. For big applications it is usually APPL->ControllerBSFNs->ModelBSFNs or just APPL->ModelBSFNs. Substitute the term MBF for "model" if you prefer.

Can't fix all the pristine code but YOUR code doesn't have to follow the same design. Just put all your "business logic" in BSFNs and that becomes your "model". Then the only ER code in your APPL is to call your "model" functions.

The really big problem with that is for small and mid sized applications, without an official MVC framework to enforce that design it becomes overkill... and then small applications turn into big applications and the simple business logic you thought you only needed in P59MYAPP you now need in R59MYUBE. So sure, if it is a simple APPL to edit a constants table or something - a direct table edit with very little "business logic", I just throw up an APPL with a databound business view because I can do it in about 10 minutes... literally.
 

jdelisths

Reputable Poster
I agree with Russell for the most part. In a nutshell, the development tool set is stuck in the the 1995 to 2000 era. Most of the enhancements are in the business applications (i.e. new modules etc). and in the user interface side (web, AIS etc).
 

78aspide78

VIP Member
Well, I found the Java Enterprise Edition (JEE) platform with Java Server Faces (JEE) development using Primefaces library and NetBeans CRUD generator the best choice for data centric Enterprise application. It's good balance between standard vs modern vs reliability applications.

What's about JD Edwards tool set, it's old, true, but it's well designed (even if there is a lot of hardcoding and so on...) and it's absolutley a cost effective solution when you need to stay in the platform. Take a look at the "modern" Oracle Fusion Applications, they are designed following all the best practices (MVC, WebService, BPEL Engine, ORM, et...) and they fails.

I don't have an in depth knowledge of all EA on the market but when I see a 20 years old designed architecture still on the top the only thing I can say is that it's well designed.
 

jdelisths

Reputable Poster
I don't think this kind of solution are for the enterprise.
Depends on your definition of "enterprise" .... I mentioned the JDE toolset to someone at Microsoft (and its ease of use) and asked him precisely the same question that JohnO asked. Lightswitch was his answer. It has been around since 2010. Yes, it can be used for enterprise apps. See http://dougseven.com/2010/08/06/myth-busting-visual-studio-lightswitch/. Most seasoned .NET developers don't like Lightswitch much because it is mostly "codeless", but it should be a good fit for someone who is used to the JDE toolset and is open to doing something out-of-the-box.

All said and done, if you already own JDE and know how to develop with it, I don't see much scope for going with a different tool to create a simple app - it will be much easier/simpler to just create it in JDE.
 

78aspide78

VIP Member
One of the definition I like of "Enterprise" software is a software capable to live for a long time (at last 10 years). We live in a rapidly changing environment; tech is evolving day by day. Yes, we need to stay current but also we need to take the right approach to tech; tech trends are not always reliable enterprise solutions. I'm not speaking about lightswitch or any other specific tool; I'm speaking about the technology evaluation right approach. Every day a new framework, library, methodology is new killing thing but few of these are alive after 2,3 year. For a Company that doesn't have in tech the core business choosing technology is like buying a new equipment, a long term investment that should serve the business and should be business driven.

Just my opinion.

Reagards.

Bruno
 
Top